An original, first generation GA-P35-DS3 shipped to vendors in June, 2007. (Source: toukatu.blogzine.jp)

In the chart above, the red line represents the field strength limit against frequency. On a six frequency sample, this particular motherboard demonstrated a field almost 7dBuV above the EU directive. (Source: Taiwan Eletronics Testing Center)

Motherboard manufacturers will do anything to save a buck, and they'll do it at the expense of your electronics

Ever wonder what that big FCC logo on your computer means?
Most people would tell you the U.S. Federal Communications Commission operates
like an all-seeing, all-knowing electronic shield; protecting America from
harmful radiation and interference.

The reality, of course, is quite different. To better illustrate this,
we've traveled the history of one motherboard. This motherboard, while
rather unimportant in the scope of all things silicon, became rather important
when a few engineers started asking the right question.

EMI, or electromagnetic interference, is a broad term that encompasses any type
of interference that can disrupt, obstruct or simply degrade electronic
transmissions. Some forms of propagated radiation are intentional, such
as radios; in other cases propagated radiation is completely
unintentional. When unwanted electromagnetic radiation is received by an
electronic device that doesn't have sufficient shielding, electromagnetic
fields can disrupt the intended fields.

Even though the motherboard boldly wears CE and FCC markings, this device
became one more component that slipped through the cracks. It was later
discovered that not only did this motherboard fail European and U.S.
electromagnetic interference regulations, but that tens of thousands of the
motherboards shipped months ago.

A Taiwanese motherboard engineer, who wished to remain anonymous, claims the
world of EMI certification runs more lax than consumers would believe.
"If we claim to pass FCC and in actuality we do not, it's just a
conscience problem."

The engineer continues, "Some manufacturers put the FCC logo on their
product even though they don't send in to any lab. If they are lucky,
they go by. If they are unlucky, they get fined by the government or in some
serious case, issue a product recall."

Conversations with other representatives reveal even in the instances of
serious violation, vendors receive little official recourse.

The most expensive Taipei-based testing facility costs approximately 2,000 USD
for full electromagnetic compliance testing.

The European Union dictates
the acceptable EMI levels for products distributed in Europe.
Manufacturers that pass the European Union's EMI directive may brand the CE
marking on their products. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has a
separate set of EMI standards that devices must pass in order to brand the FCC
logo.

In the U.S., the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) mandates the FCC
EMI limits. Title 47, Part 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations details the
acceptable EMI limits for electronic devices in the United States as follows:

30~88MHz 30dBuV
88~216MHz 33.5dBuV
216~960MHz 36dBuV
>960MHz 44dBuV

The European counterpart directive follows slightly different
limit ranges:

125~175MHz 30dBuV
250~625MHz 37dBuV

For example, all electronic
devices sold in the U.S. cannot produce an electrical field with strength of
more than 33.5 dB microvolts per meter at 90 MHz. Since fields
are measured in decibel units, an increase of 3 dB means the field strength has
approximately doubled.

Even after sitting on store shelves the better part of three months, someone
eventually noticed the Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3 acted a tad noisy --
electronically. The FCC reserves the right
to test devices at the expense of the vendor, though it rarely independently tests
devices unless a complaint has been filed.

Unfortunately for the GA-P35-DS3, several complaints were filed. The
Electronics Testing Center, Taiwan, began an electromagnetic
compliance test; three Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3 motherboards were hand-submitted to
the lab. Three out of three test results failed to stay "in
bounds" for Taiwanese and EU regulation (PDF); two out of three failed to stay
within U.S. FCC regulation.

That apparently has not enticed the Taiwanese government to order a recall or reparations.
One engineer close to the product's development states, "At least the
board was tested."

So what's special about the GA-P35-DS3? Nothing, it would seem, other
than the fact that it carries markings from both the FCC and European Union
claiming it does pass regulation. Some would argue even this particular
trait does not lend itself to individuality.

Gigabyte spokesperson Colin Brix denies all claims that the GA-P35-DS3 fails to meet EMC standards. "The tests conducted at ETC are not complete," he states. As proof, Brix shared the results of similar EMC testing conducted by QuieTek (PDF), another Taiwan-based laboratory. All motherboard tests in this round of testing were done with the motherboard in a chasis.

Ransom Cheng, a former employee at a large motherboard vendor, explains,
"The testing in Taiwan is very poor. Only a few sample ranges are
taken and the benefit of [the] doubt is always given to the vendor."
Cheng concludes, "It's not good for anyone to waste boards."

At one time, the GA-P35-DS3 was available at U.S. and European merchants, but today is no longer available in North America. Gigabyte public relations manager Angela Lan claims the GA-P35-DS3 was removed from American markets due to its lack of RAID functionality.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I'll be the first to state the average user will almost certainly not notice a problem with those board, or many other boards that fail to meet FCC and CE guidelines. The motherboard goes in a case, which sits under your desk -- and the likelihood that you have to much else "mission-critical" running at 125 MHz (or 175 if you look at the other test) is not likely.

The bigger problem here is why would a company continue to post EMC markings on a board that clearly does not fall in the proper limits for these ranges.

I suppose we'll see more expensive boards for users that assure these EMC rules are upkept. However, given that there are relatively few laws governing this stuff, isn't that something we *should* be paying for?

"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer